- From: Tony Graham <tgraham@mentea.net>
- Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2013 14:55:54 +0100 (IST)
- To: public-ppl@w3.org
Now that the W3C has Community Groups and Business Groups, it's made a task force [1] to try to work out what to do with them or, more accurately, to work out what the groups want to do to themselves. As Chair, I got to fill in a survey form about this Community Group. My current answers are below, and we have until 30 April to update the answers as necessary. Regards, Tony. [1] http://www.w3.org/wiki/Headlights2013/CG2WG --------------------------------- Your Community Group or Business Group ---- Please, name the Community Group or Business Group for which you are submitting answers. Name of your Community Group or Business Group: Print and Page Layout Community Group --------------------------------- State of your Community Group or Business Group ---- Is your Community Group or Business Group: * ( ) Active and ongoing and nearing completion * ( ) Inactive because it has completed its work * (x) Active and ongoing and far from completion * ( ) Inactive because the original scope is no longer relevant or because the CG never got momentum --------------------------------- Goal of your Community Group or Business Group ---- Is the goal of your Community Group or Business Group: * (x) To provide a specification * ( ) To be a discussion forum for specifications done elsewhere * ( ) Other (please specify) You checked "other", please specify: --------------------------------- Status of the spec of your Community Group or Business Group ---- What are your specification transition plans? * ( ) We have already handed off all or part of a specification to a Working Group. * ( ) We plan to request that a specification transition to a Working Group within six months. * ( ) We have a specification that is a candidate for transition to a Working Group but have no schedule yet for doing so. * (x) We do not plan to transition a specification to a Working Group (provide details in the next question). --------------------------------- No transition to a Working Group ---- We do not expect to transition to a Working Group for the following reasons (check all that apply): * [x] Too early, insufficient number of implementations yet. * [ ] Too narrow, not a key part of the Open Web Platform. * [ ] A Community Group or Business Group is good enough, Working Groups have too much bureaucracy. * [ ] We suspect that key players will not want to make Working Group patent commitments. * [ ] Too many key players are not Members of W3C and would not want to follow the work into a Working Group. * [ ] Other (please specify). You checked "other", please specify: --------------------------------- Open comments ---- Please, let us us know of anything you feel is relevant to complete your answers. Comments (or a URI pointing to your comments):
Received on Tuesday, 23 April 2013 13:56:18 UTC